24 February 2009 10:43 AM

Please listen to me, or you'll get something much worse

I do actually talk to members of the liberal elite, when I get the chance. Usually this is in broadcasting studios, as we wait to take part in discussion programmes, or university debates. Sometimes it is at 'literary festivals', those strange artificial gatherings to which I am occasionally invited.

These encounters (and of course I include Cameroon Tories in the liberal elite category) are difficult, and especially awkward for them, because I can sense their discomfort at the way my knuckles brush the ground. How, you can almost see them asking themselves, have I ended up in the same room as someone like this? I truly empathise.

Normally they would be insulated from people like me. I don't live near them, or take my holidays where they take theirs, or even eat or drink where they do. My tastes in almost everything from music to sandwiches are different from theirs. So I value these chances to remind them of the parallel world which exists, separate from theirs but there all the same.

And one of the points I try to make to them is this.

"You may regard me, and everything I say, as contemptible. But you should at least attempt to listen, if only because I am nothing like as bad as what you will get if you don't. I believe in pluralism, liberty of speech, freedom of the press, tolerance, the rule of law, an adversarial parliament, an independent civil service. I believe it is possible to persuade and to be persuaded, to make and to admit mistakes. I am opposed to violence in politics. I am even more opposed to racial bigotry."

This, by the way, sums up quite clearly why I shall always loathe the BNP, why I am not a secret supporter of it suppressing my views to save my job (as some of its members madly believe) and why I would never have anything to do with it, will always oppose it and would probably have to fly the country if it ever came to power. I differ fundamentally from it and draw my ideas from another tradition. I am, in a way, flattered by the way such people have adopted issues which I have been warning about for many years. They realise that these are important and that many people are concerned about them. But I think they have adopted them for propaganda purposes, not because they really care about them or have serious remedies for them.

To the liberal elite, I would add: "If you scorn my warnings about the effects of mass immigration, unchecked crime and disorder, penal taxation to finance needless empires of client workers, undisciplined education, state-sponsored immorality and the rest, then you will in the end deliver a large part of the electorate, so frustrated that they won't care any more about words like 'Nazi' and 'Fascist', into the hands of unscrupulous demagogues, who will employ these causes to seek power and may eventually destroy you - and me - completely."

I used to say: "It is all very well, during this period of artificial prosperity, to rely on people not caring enough. But if that prosperity ever ends, it will be much, much more dangerous".

Now I think I can leave off the last bit. That is why I was so alarmed by the outbreak of 'British Jobs for British Workers' protests. For a growing number of people, prosperity is a thing of the past. I am by no means sure it will ever come back. I fear that what is happening to us now is a permanent descent into the league of poorer, less stable countries.

I have also (though some of my critics on this site never seem to notice it) more than once opposed attempts to suppress and persecute the BNP, because freedom of speech only exists when you give it to people you despise. I also think of Hitler's sneering riposte to the Social Democrat MP Otto Wels, who bravely risked violence and arrest when he went to the last more-or-less free session of the Reichstag to oppose the Nazi takeover. Wels (I have written about this before) movingly opposed the suppression of opposition parties.

The trouble was that Wels's own party had in the past voted for legal restrictions on the Nazis (these restrictions had, as such things tend to do in free societies, failed). Hitler jeered at Wels's delayed conversion to tolerance in words which are hard to translate but could be summed up as: "Well done, pity you didn't think of that earlier when you were trying to ban us.” I do not want to hear such words spoken in our Parliament by the triumphant leader of a national socialist party.

It is an old ploy, I suppose, the threat of something worse in the background to make yourself look more acceptable. But I have always meant every word. I am genuinely alarmed that this country might eventually incubate some sort of national socialist populist force, trashing liberty in the name of order and patriotism, thanks to the appalling combination of ill-educated ignorance and increasingly justified discontent created by the policies of the liberal elite.

I thought it would be interesting to reproduce here (and afterwards make some wise-after-the-event comments upon) an article I wrote for the Mail on Sunday six years ago, on 9th February 2003, largely based upon an interview with Nick Griffin, the BNP leader. I had also been spending some time in the Pennine towns, where the BNP was becoming active and the problem of large, unintegrated Muslim communities had recently become rather obvious. Now the BNP bandwagon has moved south, and last week scored an alarming and possibly significant victory in formerly Labour-held council seat in Swanley, roughly where Kent and Greater London meet.

The results (which bear no relation to recent national opinion polls) were:

Paul Golding, British National Party: 408 votes.

Michael James Hogg, Labour: 332 votes.

Tony Harry Searles, Conservative: 247 votes.

Turnout for the election was 31.3 per cent.

The local MP, Tory Michael Fallon, one of the more intelligent Conservatives, commented: "It's a more general frustration at the failure of government to address quality of life issues - petty crime, vandalism, housing, jobs. All the main parties have got to address these more vigorously.”

Peter Hain, a former Labour cabinet minister, said: "It is areas when Labour has traditionally been strong - like Swanley - where the BNP has been making a great deal of headway and exploiting fears and spreading their racist and fascist beliefs."

Well spotted, those two. But as things stand, both your parties have nothing to say to the disenchanted. My article on Mr Griffin below was written, remember, six years ago.

It appeared under the headline: "This sinister sect of creeps, misfits and racists will soon be a bigger threat to Labour than the Tories"

And it said...

"A tiny sect of seriously strange people, odder than the Mormons, creepier than the Moonies and far smaller than either of them, is on the brink of transforming British politics.

In the past few weeks, the midget British National Party has succeeded in altering the policy of the Labour movement, scaring it into a position it would once have condemned as racist. Only the BNP's growing electoral success can explain last week's sudden denunciation of black-on-white violence by the Oldham East and Saddleworth Labour MP Phil Woolas.

It came just after the BNP astonished itself and everyone else by winning yet another council seat - this time in Halifax -annihilating the Tories and shouldering its way past Labour and the Liberal Democrats.

These victories can no longer be dismissed as localised freaks. In the Pennine towns where race riots are a recent memory and tension is still high, Labour now sees the BNP as a bigger adversary than the Conservatives. A recent document circulated to Labour activists in Burnley warned that the BNP is 'replacing the Tories as the enemy'.

These worries are real. In Burnley where the BNP now has three council members, cunning tactics and clever populism may well bring it still more seats in the May elections, and almost certainly more votes. By saying little and working assiduously on local issues of crime, housing and clean streets, its councillors have won a reputation as serious and sober, though all three of them have CCTV cameras installed at their homes to deter harassment by their foes.

The three councillors themselves were too nervous to meet me. Party policy seems to be that as soon as they are elected they are advised to stay away from national media in case they say something embarrassing.

And he believes the BNP's critics have failed partly because they are so alarmist: 'Our opponents said that the town would be a pariah if it elected BNP councillors, and that the local economy would suffer because businessmen would not want to invest here. They said racial tension would get worse. None of these things happened.' He also thinks - and he may well be right - that the constant denunciations of the BNP as Nazis and fascists no longer have any effect. 'People have heard it so many times they just switch off when they hear it again.' When Channel 4 recently filmed Young BNP leader Mark Collett praising Hitler, it had no effect in Halifax, though Collett was swiftly sacked from his post.

Mr Bennett gloats over Labour's new stance on the street violence issue, which his party has been complaining about for years. He is sure it is the result of BNP success. 'Phil Woolas is suddenly taking in the language of Mick Treacy', he says, a reference to the BNP's raucous and rough-edged council candidate in Oldham, much denounced by Labour during the last elections. 'They are playing catch-up, trying to preserve their power.' When the BNP holds its members' meetings in Burnley, more than 100 people turn up, ranging from footstomping skinhead youths to alarmingly passionate old ladies, but also including quiet, middle-aged, soberly dressed people who have bought their council houses and feel overtaxed, neglected and threatened in Tony Blair's multicultural Britain.

But the movement's success does not depend on membership and organisation. The votes seem to be waiting to be harvested.

In fact the BNP may well actually do better where it has no real presence, and no machine to speak of. In last year's mayoral elections in Stoke-on-Trent, where the BNP had hardly any organisation at all, it did alarmingly well. If their luck holds, the BNP leaders hope to make much greater gains in 2004 when millions of people will have three votes in local elections, and may be tempted to give one of them to this new force, just to rock the boat.

By doing so, they may start an avalanche, sweeping away the familiar political landscape. Labour leaders have known for decades that many of their voters are far from liberal on immigration issues, but have been able to ignore the problem because there was no other working class party that could outflank them.

Now there is, and the BNP is careful to be very Old Labour on issues like the NHS, which it supports vigorously.

The BNP leader, Nick Griffin, says he now thinks his party may be within sight of winning a seat in Parliament. Yet the very idea ought to be ridiculous. The BNP is a pitifully small grouplet of fanatics with unhinged policies on the economy and alarming, even barking members. Even as he told me of his organisation's string of electoral successes, Mr Griffin admitted to me that its total membership was 3,724 at the last count, and has perhaps now risen to 4,000. This is seriously small and I was amazed that he was willing to reveal such a dismal total.

And who are these people, the members rather than the voters? Many, probably most of them are consumed by depressing racial prejudice, which is actually written into their rules. Mr Griffin, affable and frank on most topics, goes very stiff and strange when asked about the party regulation which declares that membership is open only to those of British or 'closely kindred European descent'.

Some BNP members believe it says 'Northern European descent', which is rather close to 'Nordic', but Mr Griffin, himself no blond Aryan, denies this.

His hands tremble slightly as he refuses to say what he thinks about this creepy stipulation. It means that it doesn't matter what you think or even who you are. If you're the wrong colour they won't have you. A black Briton who accepted all the BNP's other policies would be shown the door because of his skin.

He explains that the definition of 'closely kindred' is a 'grey area', which is one way of putting it. Greeks can join but Turks can't. Bosnian Serbs can but Bosnian Muslims can't.

In fact, Muslims in general can't, because, says the BNP, their first loyalty is to Islam rather than Britain.

'Some members think it should be changed. I don't comment on it because it is a divisive issue,' intones Mr Griffin, quite unaware of how ludicrous this statement is, coming from the leader of a movement which is not known for avoiding divisive issues.

It is also strangely coy coming from a man who recently expelled an old friend from the BNP for the sin of having a girlfriend who was, hilariously, a South American asylum seeker. Party rules give the leader almost absolute power over the members. He is, it seems, quite prepared to use this power to take tough decisions of one kind, but not of another.

It gets more ludicrous still. As we discuss Mr Griffin's unconventional views on Jews and the Holocaust (he says he can't spell them out in case he is hauled off and tried on the Continent under the provisions of the new Europe-wide arrest warrant, which gives you a pretty good idea what those views might be), he reveals a jaw-dropping fact.

One of Griffin's party colleagues, who resents his power, suspects that Griffin himself may be Jewish and hiding the fact. This elderly maniac saw Griffin's father on television and thought his nose looked rather Jewish. It will be poetic justice if this Third Reich-style investigation finds that the BNP leader is, in fact, Jewish.

One can only hope.

Most of the time Griffin sounds quite reasonable. A Cambridge graduate with pleasant manners, who did his A-levels as one of two boys in an all-girls school, he is plainly intelligent and has a strong sense of humour.

He has run a business and gone bankrupt and done real hard-graft jobs, including stacking supermarket shelves. He is married to a nurse and has four children. He is perceptive about politics. For instance, he has spotted a major problem for Labour that nobody else seems to have noticed - that its eagerness to start a new Gulf war is devastating its previously solid Muslim Asian vote and handing it to the Liberal Democrats.

He has grasped, as many Tories have yet to do, that the Conservative Party is dying from the roots upwards and that the widespread contempt for Toryism cannot be cured by changing the image or aping New Labour.

He suspects that many Labour voters find it easier to switch to the BNP than to vote for the party of Margaret Thatcher, especially in the industrial areas where she is still blamed for the decline of manufacturing.

He wonders if Labour began by secretly hoping for BNP gains so that it could permanently split the Rightwing vote - and is now alarmed that the plan may have worked all too well.

He is elated by his impact, boasting: 'Voter turnout goes up everywhere we stand.' And he knows that he cannot get anywhere with the votes of louts and no-hopers, since most of them don't vote anyway and many of them are not even on the electoral register.

'The best response we get as we go round, in terms of thumbs-up, is on the rough estates, but the actual turnout is pitiful.

'We are not the party whose vote comes from the sink estates. We thought it did but it doesn't. It comes primarily from owner-occupied places, terraces or council estates where people have bought their homes, pay taxes and resent the way those taxes are spent.' Nobody should underestimate this man's acumen or his knowledge and understanding of the British political system.

Yet it is hard to match one half of this picture with the other. On the one hand is a cunning and skilful vote machine, on the other ingrained and discredited racial theories, Holocaust-deniers, nose measurers and violent oafs.

It is a measure of the profoundly dismal state of British politics that such a party exists or that any decent person should feel able to vote for it."

All these years later, I still remember that odd lunchtime in a nearly empty Shrewsbury pub, both of us warily circling the other. Mr Griffin had come up from his Welsh fastness and, as I recall, didn't drink alcohol. I didn't think then, and I don't think now, that he has it in him to make a national breakthrough. But I do think he has the wit to go quite a long way in that direction.

I don't at all discount suggestions that the BNP might win a seat or two in the European 'Parliament' elections, and I think they could appear quite prominently in a lot of local council polls. As to whether they can break into the Westminster Parliament, ask me in six months or so when we have begun to grasp just how bad the economic crisis is, and just how little the conventional parties can do about it. I'm not saying, by the way, that the BNP can do anything about it either. People will vote for it because it's not one of the old parties, in much the same way that the chronically ill, disappointed by conventional medicine, will turn to fringe quacks at the end, on the grounds that they can't be any worse.

I think the BNP's progress has been slower and less incremental than I thought back then. But there's no doubt of two things. One is that for many people the 'Nazi' jibe now just bounces off. The other is that intelligent Labour politicians, such as the thoughtful and original Jon Cruddas, are genuinely worried about votes sliding off in this direction.

Cruddas knows from his own Dagenham constituency just how quickly Labour voters can switch to the BNP. I think he also knows that his party's political correctness is at the heart of the problem, and I suspect he realises that he cannot defeat that. By the way, Mr Cruddas is one of the few remaining Labour MPs who hasn't sold his soul to Brussels. Labour resistance to the EU is an important political tradition going back to Hugh Gaitskell through Peter Shore and Tony Benn, and often forgotten these days.

I don't think such voters would ever have gone to the Tories. The tribal loathing of the Tories is endemic in Labour, and will not go away. It's one of the reasons why I am convinced that David Cameron cannot get an overall majority in a United Kingdom election. Even if Labour loses, he will not necessarily win. Labour unpopularity just won't convert into Tory popularity, or even grudging Tory votes.

What's needed, as I say over and over again, is a party that isn't the Tories but is genuinely conservative, neither bigoted nor politically correct. Such a party could not only give the country a chance of revival. It would be the only guaranteed democratic way to stop the BNP.

While well known hacks in our supposed right wing press keep hoping for a withdrawal from europe, an end to political correctness, an end to the disgraceful levels of immigration, the return of capital punishment, the fact that we are becoming foreigners in our own country etc etc - they slate the only party which consistently promises to address these issues - the BNP.

It is no great secret what wrong with our policing. Since the abolition of the distinction between the sexes and the downgrading of the physical requirements our Police are just not up to the job, hence the need to patrol in pairs and the need for all the extra weaponry. In the past a six foot tall policeman weight in proportion could cope with just a truncheon concealed out of sight. Until we accept that front line policing is not a job for wimps and girls we are just wasting our breath.

At present the only alternative is the BNP. I dread the possibility of another five years of Labour or Conservative government. My advice to anyone who is young and has some skills or a profession is get out while you can.
J. Vanbar

I just can't understand Peter Hitchins he doesn't like the Lib/Lab/Cons policies and what they are doing to this country.

His articles are basically the same as BNP policies, but he is so vitriolic towards them

So thats 4 political parties he doesn't support, so to take his advice we just don't vote as the perfect party doesn't exist.

So we all just sit back and let the country go to rack and ruin and just become a little dustbin island off the coast of Europe.

But the British people are much more sensible than that, and will put up a fight and will support any party that puts the Great back in Britain.We just can't carry on as we are being led at this moment of time.

The BNP continue to get attacks from the mainstream media, and from the "Anti-British Party", otherwise known as the Lib/Lab/Con, but the attackers are, right now, running scared as the power of the people starts to rise against this government and the EUSSR and the forces of globalisation such as the multi-billion pound oil companies.

The Establishment is STILL trying to portray the British National Party's support for striking British Workers as somehow being "Racist". WRONG! The BNP puts ALL British workers, regardless of race, colour, creed or class to the front of the queue for British jobs. The British National Party does not just speak in the support of "White" workers but also in support of all those genuine and legal "ethnic" workers who are just as concerned about their futures as their white counterparts.

No matter why they came here, they are here now and if they are now legally British Citizens, they have equal rights to work and protection also.

Who then are the real "racists", if not the globalists who seek destroy the lives and way of life of all British Citizens in their quest to create their One World build on slave labour?

Conservatives are always careful to define what type of Conservatism they espouse and always so careless in their failure to define the varieties of Liberalism they abhor. It is a weakness. I look forward to ''Sandwiches of the Liberal elite'' with great pleasure , however.

I thought that diversity essentially trumped everything now? Women's rights? Trumped by diversity. Working class people complaining about their wages being driven down by immigration? Trumped by diversity. Equality under the law? Trumped by diversity the need to have equal outcomes even if this means discriminating against the host population. This is based on the lie that groups are all completely equal, despite years of psychometric research showing otherwise (and it being an obvious implication of evolution). See the Snyderman/Rothman study of how the media distort academic research on this.

hallo Peter: your interview with the BNP leader was most impressive - I wish I'd read it before. Embarrassingly, I find myself arguing for... complacency (!) on this subject. As a socialist (of sorts) I find it tragic that the BNP are becoming a party of working-class protest. But I'm sure they will never set up a Third Reich in Britain. The obvious difference between Britain today and Germany in 1933 is that the business community in Weimar Germany felt lethally threatened by the existence of the organised working class, not just by the Communists, but by the SPD and the trade unions. They were therefore ready to finance a mass party of young, violent activists who could be trusted to inflict physical destruction on these organisations, in a way a democratic state could not. Without the financial backing of business - the details of which are readily available from German sources; I wish I could quote you chapter and verse - Hitler would have remained out of power, and the Nazi Party would have consequently broken up. Nobody in the business community in Britain today would donate a penny to put Brendan Barber in a concentration camp. Our weak and isolated trade unions aren't worth the bother. Thanks to yr goodself and Mrs Thatcher, but mainly thanks to their own spinelessness, they are a footnote of history. Our future is not a monolithic totalitarian state, but a criminalised jungle much like that depicted in the film "Bladerunner" - not a pleasant environment for most of us, but one in which a smart businessman will still be able to turn a good profit

Here are some especailly pertinent Articles of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The native British may or may not be ' indigenous' according to this Declaration, but it doesn't matter. The spirit of the Declaration certainly applies to them. And the 'creepy' BNP are the only party to uphold it for the native British.

Q.E.D

Article 7

1. Indigenous individuals have the rights to life, physical and mental integrity, liberty and security of person.

2. Indigenous peoples have the collective right to live in freedom, peace and security as distinct peoples and shall not be subjected to any act of genocide or any other act of violence, including forcibly removing children of the group to another group.

Article 8

1. Indigenous peoples and individuals have the right not to be subjected to forced assimilation or destruction of their culture.

Any action which has the aim or effect of depriving them of their integrity as distinct peoples, or of their cultural values or ethnic identities;
Any action which has the aim or effect of dispossessing them of their lands, territories or resources;
Any form of forced population transfer which has the aim or effect of violating or undermining any of their rights;
Any form of forced assimilation or integration;
Any form of propaganda designed to promote or incite racial or ethnic discrimination directed against them.

Article 9

Indigenous peoples and individuals have the right to belong to an indigenous community or nation, in accordance with the traditions and customs of the community or nation concerned. No discrimination of any kind may arise from the exercise of such a right.

Article 10

Indigenous peoples shall not be forcibly removed from their lands or territories. No relocation shall take place without the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous peoples concerned and after agreement on just and fair compensation and, where possible, with the option of return.

I read in the Sunday Times (so it must be true) a few years ago that George Bush Jr and Tony Bliar first met at some oil magnates castle in Scotland while Blair was still a student. What a strange coincidence that their subsequent lives should turn out as they did. ( the article was actually about something else - ie the meeting was not the point of the article).

I'm pretty convinced that we have our leaders chosen for us and that we get to vote from a pre-prepared list of options. Notice how David Davis was removed. The Tories weren't picking a leader, the next prime minister was being chosen and I suspect Davis was not sufficiently malleable and so was unsuitable. Even though he was very popular with the public and even with labour voters.

What was the background behind Davis strange resignation last year?
We are supposed to believe he lost his grip and went mad.

'I've noticed a few cases of troublesome people having heart attacks - Steve Thorburn, Robin Cook, James Goldsmith ....'

Posted by: steve | 26 February 2009 at 01:39 PM

Well, Goldsmith was cancer - but don't forget John Smith.

Tony Blair attended his first Bilderberg conference in Athens in April 1993 - perhaps not an obvious choice of candidate for this annual global powerbrokers' conference as he was merely shadow Home Secretary and John Smith was the leader of the Labour Party.

However, John Smith died of a fatal heart attack in May 1994 at the early age of 55, and we all know who won the subsequent leadership and general elections.

I wouldn't make too much of this except that the conference is shrouded in secrecy in the first place and as we are not told about it (despite the fact that senior journalists are invited along with Heads of States, Royals, CEOs etc), we can make up whatever outrageous theories we like about it in the second place.

Just a coincidence, but Bill Clinton attended his first Bilderberg conference in June 1991 in Germany when he was still Governor of Arkansas – he didn’t put in his bid for the leadership of the Democratic party until the primaries began in 1992, fielding what Wikipedia describes as ‘one of the weakest starting grids the Democrats had ever chosen.’

You say if BNP ever get in government you will leave the country, well I have left the country because of the way Labour has sold our country out to ethinic minorities, gay's, lesbians and terrorists not to mention the EU. Thankfully you and I only get one vote each which is how a democracy works but its a real shame the BNP dont have the advantage of having a columb in a national newspaper, maybe if they did they could print their views alongside yours and people of this democracy could make up their own minds. Change is coming, you cant fool all the people all of the time, when BNP get enough seats for you to decide to leave I will return and hopefully it wont be too late to save our once great country.

Finally.
Oh...year , damn fast , and I had to be...
Now , the only real sign of National solidarity & resistance came with the Fuel Protest.
Petroleum being the life blood of any industrial economy , the blockages at refineries threatened the very functioning of the entire Nation.
Peaceful , well natured but determined , family friendly and with transparent widespread support , the hauliers and all their multiple supporters , presented a tricky target for any government.
Tear gas & riot Police ? Don't think so.
On about day three , Tony Blair appeared on the front of 'The Sun' under the headline ; 'ROLL 'EM'. Meaning the tankers.
He adjudged his 'personal authority' to exist with the public.
His last throw of the dice really , after days of emollient words.
The result was a surge in numbers at the picket.
Oh dear.
the Security Services exist to address such situations.
Sure enough , with concomitant intense TV coverage , skin headed BNP newspaper sellers and leaflet hander-outers appeared.
The protest faded away like magic. I recall more details but.......
What made the BNP decide that the price of fuel was a vote winner ?
Why , given public revulsion at this juncture , is the BNP presented as 'about to take off' for evermore ?
What was Special Branch & MI5 doing to restore 'normal service' as is their sworn duty ?
The Nazis needed a Jewish Menace , the Bolsheviks their wreckers & Counter Revolutionaries some say Heretics played the same role for The Inquisition.
The fanatical and dangerous revolutionaries in power today need the BNP. They need Islamophobia , 'Homophobia' etc.
They basicaly do not exist.
We need faith and fortitude.

It's all very well being all liberal and nicey nicey to a half a million odd foreigners. But this stance, unchecked, has now progressed to the point where 20% of the population is non-British, and growing rapidly. In the lifetimes of our children, it is quite likely that Britain will be a moslem-dominated country. This utter betrayal has been carried out at the hands of the creepiest gang of backboneless third-rate nobodies this country has ever had for leaders since King John.

So far as I can see the BNP now simply thinks that the British are entitled to their ethnic identity as are other peoples. Native Americans hang on to their identity, as do the Israelis. The Japanese aren't importing millions of foreigners. The Chinese, probably the most intelligent people on the planet with the exception of Ashkenazi Jews, are proud to be Han. Why should the British and the BNP be blamed if they want the same for themselves?

The BNP believes that our culture is superior to others, and they are right , certainly the culture until recently, but they do not necessarily believe that the British are intellectually superior. If they were as thick as bricks, it wouldn't matter .
They are our own.

This might come as a surprise to Mr Hitchens, but on the whole people prefer to live and have their being amongst their own kind, and I mean racially as well as religously and culturally.The existence fof ethnic 'areas' and white flight goes to prove this as does the existence of ethnic nation-states in the first place. England would never have existed in the first place had it not been for the racial / cultural /religious affiniities between its founding peopes.

If you accept that, and that societies work best where people have an ethnic, blood relationship,. then you agree withe BNP.

This simple fact of human nature has escaped our rulers, but not the BNP. It is the BNP who will harvest the grapes of wrath to come.

I'd save your angst and worry for something more significant Peter. Our fiat worthless paper currencies are circling the water flushing down the pan on their way to the sewer. Our walking dead banks are insolvent if not actually bankrupt and are only 'functioning' (barely) because of a never ending supply of taxpayer money shovelled at them by a deranged maniac. China, Russia, Japan, Germany and the Gulf States are quietly making their own arrangements - a basket of new world currencies even as the US and UK slide into the murk of third world status with impending blood in the streets. JP Morgan Chase, the holder of a monolithic interest rate swap derivatives position (aggregate 87 Trillion so far) has been officially exempted from the usual accounting and securities disclosure obligations and is propping up the US dollar. This same fine upstanding bank is hugely implicated too in gold price manipulation with mind boggling short positions. This chicanery will not last and when it all implodes, as it will, most likely around early 2010, you won't care either way if the BNP or a filthy mouthed marxist thug from Searchlight is in power because the world as you know it will lie in shreds at your feet.

The Civil Contingencies Act is widely debated on many forums including the BNP website so you need to get out and about a bit more if you believe you are the only one to realize its implications. Do you understand the implications of ACPO (Assoc. of Chief Police Officers) being a Limited company? They are exempt from the FOI Act as I discovered. In other words our chief police officers are beyond scrutiny by the public yet they are in charge of the accreditation scheme that selects private individuals for powers of arrest and detention. You're living in Stasi Britain Peter. Never mind the facsists, marxists and other oiks.

If I were you I'd apply for a job at the Guardian. It will be the only paper still standing when all this is over - and still trawling for £30,000 + a year one legged lesbian outreach workers I'm sure.

I don't read your column often and post even less so remember what I say won't you Peter.

Continued
It seems obvious to me that the Establishment desperately need the BNP. Can you imagine the 'Anti-Racist' , racist legislation we have today without a BNP in existence ? The Police recruitment policies for example ? What would the likes of Vaz have said about the 'British Jobs....' strikers if not for the BNP ? Remember how constant TV association of the National Front with the Union Jack tarnished our flag.
That may not have been organised and deliberate but what we have now (re-BNP) is.
Mr H has asked for people to blog in in support of him , can you imagine if he were to write " Please write in with your honest , material , examples of how the BNP have adversely affected your life ."
How many examples might there be ?
Then replace BNP with : aggressive Muslim contempt ( I'll give examples if you like ) ; dishonest and negligent PC Policing ; Local Government dereliction of duty ; Liberal Criminal Justice Policy ; gangs on the streets , especially in London , and especially non-English ; negligent treatment in the NHS ; almost sadistic treatment of the elderly and infirm.
Non of the above changes the fact that , running from the BNP,at night , alone and with zero hope of rescue , is not fun. I have been in this situation ( once ). Good job I used to be dam fast.
However , what is the real National threat ?
What is likely to cause the most pain ?
Who dragged us to this position ?
Never the BNP so why all the fuss ?
Continued

"Guy , John Richardson , I concede it is possible that you are correct , but do you have any evidence ?"

Rob 25-02-09 8:11pm

Thank you for the question Mr 'Rob'.
I suppose you are asking about evidence that the BNP are not what they are posited as being by the Liberal Establishment ?
O.K.
Tricky to commit to text with the limitations of this format.
However,
Is there one area of contemporary life that is not lied about almost pathalogically by our new masters ?
NHS-AIDS-'Inclusive' Education-Exam Results-Unemployment Figures-Illegal Immigration-Police Effectiveness/Crime/Early Release-War-Drugs-Islam-Child Protection-Climate Change.
In every case the official line is a lie. We could add others but we are being ruled by people who need to tell lies.
Now , one evening about five or six years ago the BBC , during it's Local Govn. Elections coverage , carried a running analysis of BNP votes in every single ward in the UK ( some miniscule ). Either the BBC is a hyper conscientious political observer , or instead , it is a part of an agenda to pretend that the Far Right are on the march when they are not.
The media (esp. TV ) are obssessed with the BNP. Why would they tell the truth when they lie about so much else ?
Continued to Avoid Rejection

Nick Griffin’s “hidden agenda” isn’t actually as hidden as all that: he helpfully explained it when addressing a meeting of white nationalists in the USA on 22 April 2000, with former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke sitting on the stage behind him.

Addressing his white racist audience, Griffin said:

“There’s a difference between selling out your ideas and selling your ideas, and the BNP isn’t about selling out its ideas - which are your ideas - but we are determined now to sell them, and that means, basically, to use the saleable words, as I say: “freedom”, “security” “identity”, “democracy”; nobody can criticise them; nobody can come at you and attack you on those ideas: they are saleable.”

And then:

“Perhaps one day - once, by being rather more subtle, we have got ourselves in a position where we control the British broadcast media - then perhaps the British people might change their minds and say, “Yes, every last one must go”; perhaps they will one day, but if you hold that out as your sole aim to start with, you’re going to get absolutely nowhere. So, instead of talking about racial purity, we talk about identity.”

Hi Peter,
Very perceptive of you back then in early 2003. I am a 43 year old degree deducated professional with a house in the country in Gloucestershire. Probably not your image of a BNP member but I am and have been for 12 months.
Never before have I been a card carrying member of any political party until now.
The reason people are flocking to BNP is as you say, the main parties stopped listening to the people and now the people don't listen to them.
Watch this space come June 4th and beyond. Time for the people to have their say.

Of course the BNP thrives on the failure of main stream parties, it is becoming the only party that speaks about the things that matter to the general public, opposing unlimited imigrants into the country dosen't make one a rascist but a realist, in this time of financial meltdown people are naturally worried about their futures and that of their children. When I see ( has I have ) immigrants given preference over the jobs that may be available, is it any wonder that those affected look for an alternative answer, ( misplaced though it may be ) in a party that seems to have the policies for them. I am too old to work now 73yrs, I ask myself would I be voting for the BNP where I affected by lack of employment. I don't want to answer myself , I might get a shock.

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear on this weblog until the moderator has approved them. They must not exceed 500 words. Web links cannot be accepted, and may mean your whole comment is not published.